Please note: You need to have 'Active content' enabled in your IE browser in order to see the index of articles on this webpage

Zimbabwe's Mugabe in Rome for food summit

Boston Globe

Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe (C) sits in the car as he
arrives at the Fiumicino airport in Rome June 1, 2008. Mugabe will take part in
the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organisation summit in Rome from June 3-5. This is
Mugabe's first official trip outside Zimbabwe since the disputed elections.
(REUTERS/Alessandro Bianchi)

By Phil Stewart

June 1, 2008

ROME (Reuters) - Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe flew into Rome for a
global food summit on Sunday, his first official trip abroad since elections
condemned by Western and opposition leaders as fraudulent.

The unexpected presence of Mugabe, accused by domestic critics of running
down agriculture and causing food shortages in his own country, could offer a
rare opportunity for direct contacts with Western leaders. But Zimbabwean state
television, announcing his departure, made no suggestion of bilateral talks.

Mugabe, facing a June 27 presidential run-off against Movement for Democratic
Change (MDC) opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, arrived at Rome airport with
his wife and a large delegation of officials. He made no comment to
reporters.

The European Union has a travel ban on the veteran leader, facing new
criticism over an alleged security crackdown against the opposition, because of
his human rights record. Since the FAO summit is taking place under a United
Nations umbrella, however, the Rome meeting would be open to him.

Around 60 heads of state and government, including Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad who will be making his first trip to Western Europe as Iran's
president, are expected to meet in Rome from June 3-5 to discuss global problems
of poverty and malnutrition caused by steep rises in food prices.

In 2005 Mugabe attended the FAO's 60 anniversary celebrations where he railed
against U.S. President George W. Bush and then British Prime Minister Tony
Blair, calling them "international terrorists" and comparing them to Adolf
Hitler.

Gerry Jackson, from the ex-patriate Zimbabwe radio station SW Radio Africa
that broadcasts from London, told Reuters: "It is outrageous that he (Mugabe)
has been invited to any international forum when he is involved in a
state-sponsored, incredibly violent campaign against the opposition."

A British Foreign Office spokesman in London, asked for reaction to Mugabe's
Rome visit, told Reuters: "It is a matter of concern to us and we would prefer
that he did not attend."

UNCERTAIN FUTURE

Mugabe, who has ruled Zimbabwe since independence from Britain in 1980 and is
the only leader most Zimbabweans have known, will arrive in Rome with an
uncertain political future.

After a lengthy delay in releasing the March 23 presidential poll results,
figures from Zimbabwe's electoral commission showed Tsvangirai won more votes
but not enough to avoid a run-off. The opposition complained of vote rigging and
said Tsvangirai won the contest outright.

The controversy over the election is only the latest in a series of ballot
disputes over the years but it is the most serious and analysts say it
illustrates the deep frustration Zimbabweans feel about his handling of the
country's finances.

Zimbabwe's economy is a shambles. Inflation is 165,000 percent, unemployment
80 percent and there are chronic shortages of basic necessities including food
and fuel.

Some 3.5 million people have fled to neighboring countries to escape poverty
and malnutrition.

Mugabe accuses Western countries of sabotaging Zimbabwe's economy through
sanctions imposed to punish him and top ruling party officials for alleged
rights abuses and election fraud.

Mugabe, 84, is viewed by many in Africa as an independence hero. But critics
say he has run the country into the ground through mismanagement of its once
thriving economy and the 2000 redistribution of critical commercial farms to
landless blacks with little or no experience in operating them.

Mugabe's last trip to Europe in December for a Commonwealth meeting in
Portugal was boycotted by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown to protest the
Zimbabwean leader's participation.

Mugabe was in Italy in 2005, when he attended Pope John Paul II's
funeral.

Tsvangirai says Mbeki 'no longer fit' to be Zimbabwe mediator

· Letter tells
president there will be 'no country left'· US says Mbeki warned Bush to stay
out of crisis

Chris McGreal in JohannesburgThe Guardian,Monday
June 2 2008

The Zimbabwean opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, has told
South Africa's president, Thabo Mbeki, that he is no longer fit to serve as
the region's mediator in Zimbabwe's political crisis owing to a "lack of
neutrality", and that "there will be no country left" if Mbeki continues to
side with President Robert Mugabe.

The warning comes in a letter from
the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) leader to Mbeki made public just
days after it was revealed that the South African president had written a
four-page letter to George Bush demanding that the US president stop
criticising Mugabe.

In his letter, Tsvangirai accuses Mbeki of colluding
with Mugabe to play down the deepening political crisis, of blocking UN
security council discussions on Zimbabwe and of trying to facilitate a
controversial weapons delivery from China to the Zimbabwean
military.

But some of the strongest criticism is over Mbeki's reaction to
the escalating state-sponsored campaign of murder, violence and arrests
against the opposition in the run up to the run-off presidential election
between Mugabe and Tsvangirai at the end of this month. At least 50 people
have been killed and thousands beaten.

The letter, dated May 13,
accuses South Africa's president of ignoring evidence that Harare was
planning the violence, including a leaked Zimbabwean military document
outlining the strategy that Tsvangirai personally handed to
Mbeki.

"When you started mediating, Zimbabwe still had a functioning
economy, millions of our citizens had not fled to other countries to escape
political and economic crisis, and tens of thousands had not yet died from
impoverishment and disease. In fact, since the March 29 election, Zimbabwe
has plunged into horrendous violence while you have been mediating. With
respect, if we continue like this, there will be no country left," writes
Tsvangirai.

"As you know, when MDC attempted to appeal to the UN
security council to investigate and help stop the carnage, it was you, the
so-called 'neutral' mediator, who blocked a possible road to resolution of
the crisis."

Tsvangirai says Mbeki continued to act as if everything was
normal, even after the Zimbabwean government blocked the release of poll
results showing that Mugabe and his Zanu-PF party had lost.

"Your
lack of neutrality became increasingly evident when I arrived to the Lusaka
summit to see you and Mr Mugabe on television together proclaiming there is
'no crisis' in Zimbabwe," the letter says.

Tsvangirai also accuses the
South African government of facilitating the delivery of weapons via Durban
from a Chinese ship that was eventually turned away by dock workers and
legal action.

"Not only have you been unable to denounce the
well-documented post-election attacks on our people, but your government
even played a role in Zimbabwean government procurement of weapons of
repression ... and agree to allow passage of arms of war purchased by the
same government through South African territory during the troubled
post-election period," he writes.

The letter demands Mbeki step down as
the Southern African Development Community mediator on Zimbabwe, as the MDC
no longer has confidence in him.

His spokesman, Mukoni Ratshitanga, has
denied knowledge of the letter even though the MDC says it has a receipt
showing it was delivered to Mbeki's office. Ratshitanga has also denied
knowledge of the letter to Bush revealed by the Washington Post last week in
an article which quotes an unnamed US official as saying Mbeki told Bush to
"butt out" of Zimbabwe.

But the US embassy in Pretoria confirmed that
Mbeki's letter existed and was delivered to Bush.

Yesterday, the
leader of a breakaway MDC faction, Arthur Mutambara, was arrested and
charged over a newspaper column criticising Mugabe's handling of the
economy, with inflation now above 1,000,000%, and accusing the security
forces of abuses.

William Gumede: Silent African leaders are accomplices in
these crimes

Independent, UK

Monday, 2 June 2008

Although it is too late for those
who have already lost their lives, regional African leaders must now surely
step in to prevent even more people being openly maimed, forced out of their
homes, and starved by Robert Mugabe and his ruling Zanu-PF party as part of
the scorched earth policy to win the dubious upcoming presidential election
by crooked means.

Although the opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai has
been robbed of a clear victory in the first round of the presidential poll,
and unfairly forced into a run-off vote, regional African leaders, the West
and the United Nations should ensure that bloodshed stops, and the country's
brutalised citizens can venture out in relative safety to cast their
vote.

Instead of agreeing to "butt out", as South African President Thabo
Mbeki told George W Bush in a letter that came to light last week, the
international community must now intervene with greater resolve. Setting
aside the odd statement, the West and the United Nations have been
staggeringly timid. China and Zimbabwe's other friends outside Africa must
also put pressure on Mugabe to stop this madness. There is not a moment to
spare. The UN must flood Zimbabwe with peacekeepers and election observers
and insist Mugabe allows all outside media.

Mugabe's brutal precision
attacks on those who voted for opposition parties in March has advanced to
staggering levels. It is clear that in his illegal recounting of the results
of the parliamentary poll and first-round presidential ballot, Mugabe has
obtained the districts that voted for the opposition, and is systematically
targeting these communities to batter them into not voting
again.

President Mbeki, having faced the devastating consequences of
propping up Mugabe – and by that I mean the violent attacks against
Zimbabweans who had fled their country and taken refuge in South African
townships – must own up to reality and condemn Mugabe.

The regional
Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the continental African
Union must do the same. Their deafening silence has made them complicit in
the atrocities. Only the most delusional can now say Mugabe is waging a
struggle against Western imperialists. He is waging a war against his own
people.

Mr Gumede is author of Thabo Mbeki And The Battle For The Soul Of
The ANC

Fear and fortitude

Independent, UK

Leading article: Monday, 2 June
2008

Less than four weeks remains before the run-off vote for the
presidency of Zimbabwe. In view of the protracted confusion that has been
the country's election, this may not seem very long. Four weeks, though, is
plenty of time for the agents of Robert Mugabe's regime to extend their
campaign of lethal intimidation.

As we report today, a new wave of
disappearances, beatings and killings is well underway, targeting Morgan
Tsvangirai's opposition Movement for Democratic Change and its supporters.
Ndira Tonderai, a tireless opposition activist, aged only 30, is only the
best-known of 50 individuals who have been killed; up to 25,000 have been
driven from their homes.

The fresh outbreak of violence is especially
marked in the rural north and north-east, where the showing for Mr Mugabe's
Zanu-PF party was particularly poor in March. None of this augurs well for a
free or fair election. Mr Tsvangirai himself has only just returned to
Zimbabwe to campaign. He says he believes his life is no longer in danger.
Instilling fear among the voters seems to be the preferred tactic of Mr
Mugabe's coterie. Some fear Mr Tsvangirai may have surrendered his advantage
by his long absence. But it was always going to take outstanding courage and
resolve to dislodge Mr Mugabe.

Simply by agreeing to contest the
run-off in an election he believes he won fair and square, Mr Tsvangirai
occupies the moral high ground. But if change is to be accomplished through
the ballot-box, it will require fortitude on the part of voters who
supported the MDC last time around and extreme vigilance on the part of all
the election observers and Zimbabwe's well-wishers abroad. The opposition
has a desperately hard task ahead, but this time it is not – quite – mission
impossible.

Zimbabwean migrants who sought new life limp back
into Mugabe's arms

The TimesJune 2, 2008

Two weeks of township violence was too much for
expatriate Zimbabweans

Philip Pank in JohannesburgThey fled economic
meltdown and repression under Robert Mugabe's brutal regime. But yesterday,
under the cover of darkness, the first mass repatriation of Zimbabweans in
South Africa began.

A convoy of buses left in silence, taking home 700
victims of the xenophobic attacks that have engulfed South Africa's poor
townships. There was little hope or excitement as the passengers climbed
aboard at Germiston, a satellite town ringed with illegal squatter camps
where the poorest migrant workers had lived until their neighbours turned
against them. Such was the venom meted on them that mothers with sleeping
children strapped to their backs, husbands who had left children and wives,
skilled and unskilled were ready to return to a country riven by political
violence.

“It is better to be killed by my young brother than to be
killed by someone I do not know,” said Douglas, 28, a mechanic from Harare.
“I was beaten here and lost everything I worked for for two years, so I am
going home without anything.”

As he talked about the soaring
unemployment in his home country and the prospect of voting in the
presidential run-off election on June 27, three burly men in leather jackets
appeared out of the night. From now on the agents of Mr Mugabe's regime
would never be far from Douglas. Yet he felt he had no choice but to
return.

The same was true of John, 32, who had spent 15 years in the
Tokoza township. He married a South African and was a proud father. But a
mob wielding clubs and knives drove him from his home. “I ran away and had
to leave my wife and kid. Imagine how terrible it makes me feel being forced
to leave the people I love,” he said. But when the men in leather jackets
appeared, his tone changed. “Given the opportunity I have been given by my
Government, I will go home a happy man,” he boomed. “I want to equate this
journey to the journey made by the Israelites to the Promised Land.”More
than 60 foreigners were killed and 650 wounded in two bloody weeks in the
townships as locals accused immigrants of taking their jobs and houses and
of fomenting crime. The violence hit production in the mines, tarnished
South Africa's image, and terrified the migrant workers who kept the wheels
turning.

Many fled with nothing more than the clothes they were
wearing. Others managed to salvage at least something. Peter had retrieved
the window frames and metal grills from his home. “I have decided to build
another house in Zimbabwe,” he said, scant reward for nine years spent
repairing his neighbours' mobile phones. “Maybe I can find a place to carry
on the same project. I believe in hard work. I do not expect the Government
to find me a job.”

Simon Khaya Moyo, Zimbabwe's Ambassador to
Pretoria, was there, handing out blankets to those shivering under a
star-filled night. “Land will be provided for those who want to be settled
on the land. Food will be provided and the social amenities to get them
reintegrated into their communities,” he promised.

Asked how a
government that is struggling to pay the salaries of key workers could
afford to finance a resettlement programme, he answered: “We must find money
for that. Things are hard everywhere, not just in Zimbabwe.” But things are
about to get even harder for families who rely on remittances from the three
million Zimbabweans thought to be living in South Africa.

The Red Cross
reported that thousands of Zimbabweans had fled the townships for Zambia,
Mozambique and Botswana. Until yesterday there had been no mass movement
back home. The violence has achieved one thing that President Mugabe could
not: it has slowed the exodus from his country to a trickle.

Analysis: How Mugabe will lose the runoff election

Public
posturing by the Zanu PF electoral campaign team sponsoring octogenarian
party leader Robert Mugabe suggests that the despot will win the
Presidential poll on 27 June 2008 with a resounding and reverberating
landslide. Analyses of events on the ground suggest otherwise that the
converse is the more likely outcome to what his campaign team is attempting
to sell.

Mugabe’s defeat is no longer the issue but rather the margin
and how power will be wrestled from him and his Junta. Dr Sikhanyiso
Ndlovu the man Robert Gabriel Mugabe entrusted with the Information and
Publicity portfolio in the immediate past Zanu PF government has made a
startling prediction that Robert Mugabe will win the runoff Presidential
poll with a landslide 75% of the vote.

This is not far from the 70%
margin believed to have voted against him on 29 March 2008 and must be
understood by the electorate to be the margin Zanu PF fears he will lose the
runoff by.

His wife Grace who hitherto has played a lid back
supporting role for the tired dictator has revealed that her husband will
only be removed from office by a yet to emerge Zanu PF aspirant for the
throne is a manifestation of the fear Mugabe’s handlers have in taking risks
of recklessly supporting his bid to be preside for the sixth successive term
since Zimbabwe became a republic.

And they have every reason to be
cautious because circumstances are stacked against a Mugabe victory in the
runoff presidential poll whichever way one looks at it.

Mugabe at 84,
reportedly blind and under economic siege took four weeks to recover from
the shocking defeat he and his Zanu PF party suffered on 29 March and half
heartedly accepted to participate in the runoff provided his backers were
prepared to guarantee his win at whatever cost to allay real fears he held
that Zimbabwe would erupt into civil strife if he did not accept the defeat
he and his party suffered in March.

After his military backers had
managed to suppress any uprising for four weeks when Presidential election
results were being held back to test if such an eventuality was on the cards
Mugabe summoned enough courage to accept re-entry into the Presidential race
runoff misled that first round winner was in exile because he feared the
military reprisals and had no willing supporters to stand by him against the
military repression they have threatened in the past and are prepared to use
to coerce support for Mugabe in the runoff.

Clearly that was an
inaccurate assessment of the political mood in the country. The only reason
why an uprising did not erupt was because Tsvangirai appealed to his
supporters to exercise restraint and allow ZEC time to finalise the results
and announce them before a decision could be made on what course of action
he would take to claim his obvious triumph.

After much pondering Zanu
PF agreed for ZEC to award victory to Tsvangirai in line with general public
expectations but ensure the victory was not conclusive to buy the time
needed to recollect the scattered Zanu PF support and embolden it with the
show of muscle in the military that Mugabe is in full swing implementation
throughout the country.

The plan is to bludgeon opponent supporters,
displace and scatter them and ensure they will never brave a step to the
polling station come June 27 paving the way for Mugabe’s landslide
“re-election.”

That was evident when Tsvangirai was forced to remain
“exiled” and his supporters were believed to have been abandoned by their
“cowardly leader.” Mugabe’s invincibility had been restored so the party
backing him thought.

Geriatric campaigners in Zanu PF behind Mugabe’s
re-election bid have been outsmarted by the youthful MDC election machinery
behind Tsvangirai at every turn leading to and after this election and
therein lies the reason Mugabe will be humiliated in the impending
runoff.

Mugabe’s age is too advanced for him to be a reputable
political force. His oratory skills may not have diminished but his
charisma, emphasis, coherence, appeal, energy and aura of invincibility has
been retarded and punctured by a combination of old age, failed economic
policies and confirmed defeat in the March 29 elections.

There is
total belief that Mugabe no longer has the support of the majority of the
people of Zimbabwe other than that he relies on the military control to
remain in office.

The belief is no longer that he cannot be defeated in
elections but rather that if he is defeated he will resort to military
violence to retain his headship of the country.

Mugabe himself
knows that he is too old to be in charge of the country let alone command an
army with any measure of success.

The MDC has convinced many in the
military and security ministries that Mugabe is no longer relevant to them.
Only the upper ranks still believe in Mugabe’s political relevance and are
prepared to risk life and limb for his re-election.

It is these
top security strategists that have rolled out the violent re-election
campaign for Mugabe and have wowed to use their powers to order their
subordinates to campaign for Mugabe, supervise his re-election and guarantee
it by hook or crook.

They have elaborate plans to ensure all National
Security personnel vote for Mugabe thus guaranteeing him between 350000 to
500000 votes.

They will be expected to deliver another 30 000 to 50 000
votes from assisted polling stations voters and reduce Tsvangirai’s votes by
a further 100000 to 200000 votes by slowing down voting processes in
perceived MDC strongholds in cities and towns as well as urbanised growth
points.

But the strategy is bound to backfire on Mugabe. The March
election results indicate that between 60-80% of voters in electoral wards
where military personnel are concentrated rejected Zanu PF and Mugabe. At
the very minimum it means whoever Mugabe seconds to ZEC to supervise the
elections here is a likelihood that 60% will be against his bid and will
assist voters to vote against him.

Further there is evidence that all
military and security officers that will be compelled to cast supervised
postal ballots will if deployed for electoral duties vote for Tsvangirai
wherever they will be stationed. Those that will not be on duty will vote
again at their wards thus cancelling the vote or doubling the vote for
either candidate in the ward.

A voter turnout of between 60-80% is not an
unreasonable expectation for this election because of the rigging mechanisms
Mugabe intends to employ.

The violence visited on MDC supporters real
or imagined has increased awareness of the election among the rural
electorate currently suffering the most from Mugabe’s failed economic
policies. The death and injuries suffered in families and communities have
brought them closer to each other politically and there is more
determination among them to avoid retaining Mugabe and suffering the same
violent ordeal when the next election is held

Food supplies are severely
inadequate everywhere in the country and Mugabe has no capacity nor the
resources to ameliorate the problem among the rural electorate whose support
he has in the past bought with selective supplies of food
aid.

Inflation is now out of radar and whenever they are found, goods
and services are beyond the reach of most of the rural electorate that Zanu
PF used to abuse and lie to that it was because of the sanctions. They all
witnessed the Police and Army operatives looting shops during the ill
advised Price Wars Mugabe waged and they know that and nothing else to be
the reason why their services are no longer available and
expensive.

School fees and health services are beyond reach and the
schools have been deserted by the teachers fleeing Mugabe sponsored military
pre-election violent campaigns. The voters are livid with Mugabe for causing
these disruptions to their children’s education and are determined to see
his back from the President’s office.

It is no longer possible
for the people to attend funerals of families, relatives and friends because
of inhibitive transport costs ever on the increase. The 10 buses per
province Mugabe promised before March 29 are nowhere to be seen, Doctors
went on strike for election campaign vehicles they were promised but never
received.

Cash is not easily accessible even if you have positive
balances in the bank, the liberalised foreign exchange regime cannot be
supported in cash by the Banks as they cannot raise the cash equivalent for
available forex and they have to top up with forced deposits in current and
savings accounts whose charges supersede the interests they pay out to
depositors and do not allow withdrawals above $ 5 billion per day or £3.00
at current rates of exchange.

The people are asking without
finding answers how the rate exchange has impacted on the national budget
and how the obvious deficit will be financed. The import and export duty
regime that charges duty in the 60% margin for “luxury” imports remains
intact even when such duties are paid in forex whose origins the government
does not play a part in creating and duty rates at source are less than
5%.

Mugabe and his National Bank governor have no explanation as
to why they expect people to pay duties equivalent to tow thirds of the cost
of luxuries when they can buy local substitutes in worthless
ZW$’s.

Meanwhile all Mugabe is being fooled to do is to campaign on
the delinquent sovereignty, sanctions and land ownership mantra that no one
believes he is committed to after failing to deliver them the land in 8
years of initiating the programme.

His cronies to whom he
allocated the land continue to receive government assistance like farm
mechanisation products and fuel that they sell on the black market without
producing food for the nation. Mugabe’s defeat is scripted in his failed
rule over 28 years whose effects he is not addressing. He is definitely
going down on 27 June 2008.

Zimbabwe Vigil Diary - 31st May 2008

There was anxious discussion at the
Vigil of the xenophobic violence in South Africa. At a meeting afterwards
it was agreed that we would ask the police for permission to stage a protest
outside the South African High Commission in London from noon to 2 pm on
Thursday, 12th June.

We will ask the High Commissioner to pass the
following petition to President Mbeki: "Following the recent attacks on
Zimbabweans and other foreign nationals in South Africa we, the undersigned,
call on President Mbeki to take action to ensure the safety of these
endangered people and bring the perpetrators to justice. We urge President
Mbeki to end his support of President Mugabe, allowing a resolution of the
Zimbabwe crisis and the return home of exiled Zimbabweans. Zimbabwean blood
is at your door."

Many of our supporters have requested a prayer
vigil. We have had many pastors visiting the Vigil in the past few years and
we are pursuing this proposal.

Also discussed was the possibility of
setting up a fund to support victims of the election violence in Zimbabwe.
It was pointed out that our partner Restoration of Human Rights in Zimbabwe
(ROHR Zimbabwe) had already contributed substantial money to support victims
of violence, most notably helping to pay for Tonderai Ndira's funeral and
providing Tichanzii Gandanga with the means to leave Zimbabwe to get
treatment in South Africa. It was agreed that it would be duplication to
set up a separate fund and that we should channel any money through ROHR.
Thanks to one supporter who generously gave £100 as a contribution Mr
Gandanga's medical expenses.

We were distressed to hear that the parents
of Chengetai Mupara, a founding member of the Vigil, were beaten up by Zanu
PF. What made this worse was that they were betrayed by Chengetai's cousin
Grace Mvududu who stood as a Zanu PF candidate in the council elections and
lost to the MDC. What is happening in Mugabeland that families are turned
against each other?

As the election run-off approaches there is no sign
of a let up in the violence. ROHR's leader Sten says it's too dangerous to
sleep in your own home. It is safer to bed down with the homeless at the
railway station.

Thanks to David McAllister who provided us and the
Glasgow Vigil with arresting posters of the violence. These can be seen in
two short videos which have been posted on the Vigil photo site.

The Vigil, outside the Zimbabwe Embassy, 429 Strand,
London, takes place every Saturday from 14.00 to 18.00 to protest against
gross violations of human rights by the current regime in Zimbabwe. The
Vigil which started in October 2002 will continue until
internationally-monitored, free and fair elections are held in Zimbabwe. http://www.zimvigil.co.uk.

Murdered by Mugabe's mob

His eyes gouged out and his
tongue cut off, Tonderai Ndira is one of 50 opposition activists killed in
the run-up to Zimbabwe's election

By Daniel Howden and Raymond
WhitakerMonday, 2 June 2008

Tonderai Ndira will not be
campaigning when Zimbabwe votes again. He will not rally his neighbourhood,
as he did two months ago, for one last push against an unwanted regime.
Instead, he is buried in an unmarked grave in the Warren Hills cemetery in
Harare. A week on from his funeral, only his brother knows for sure which of
the mounds is his. He will not leave a marker because he believes state
agents are still not finished with the murdered activist. They would like to
dig up his brother's remains to remove the incriminating evidence.

Mr
Ndira's body was only found by accident in one of the capital's morgues a
fortnight ago. His eyes had been gouged out and his tongue cut off. The
30-year-old was so badly beaten his father had trouble identifying him. A
distinctive ring confirmed the identity of a man compared by some to South
Africa's murdered rights activist, Steve Biko.

Mr Ndira, a lifelong
campaigner for political change, had been arrested more than 30 times but
kept up his opposition to the government that has led Zimbabweans to the
lowest life expectancy in the world. His remains – a crushed skull, a bullet
wound through the chest and blood-stained shorts – are a depressing metaphor
for Zimbabwe in the aftermath of a stolen election.

On 27 June, this
bankrupt and terrorised country will go back to the polls. A wave of
abductions, punishment beatings and murders of opposition activists is under
way in an attempt to turn the outcome on its head and prolong the rule of
President Robert Mugabe. This effort has entered a new phase and, while the
bodies of the disappeared are starting to turn up in the mortuaries, more
are being abducted all the time. At least 50 have died, 1,500 have been
treated in hospital, 25,000 have been driven from their homes and countless
more have lost their livelihoods.

David Coltart, an opposition senator,
says violence in rural areas where the ruling Zanu-PF party did badly in the
March poll, mainly in the north and north-east, has intensified. Speaking in
London, the human rights lawyer said an estimated 25,000 people had been
displaced in the past three weeks and the authorities had begun targeting
individuals in the "second and third tier" of the opposition Movement for
Democratic Change (MDC).

It was in this phase that Mr Ndira met his fate.
His circumstances echo those of scores of others victimised in a
state-sponsored campaign to beat the MDC into submission. A veteran of
numerous arrests and internments, beatings and torture, Mr Ndira was
accustomed to keeping on the move and staying one step ahead of the state
security apparatus. Two weeks ago, suffering from exhaustion, he returned
home to Mabvuku township outside Harare. Before dawn, say his family and
other witness, a group of about 10 men, some masked and carrying Kalashnikov
AK-47 rifles, appeared at his doorstep and demanded to see him. His wife
called out to him and he asked the visitors to call back later. Instead,
they burst into the activist's home and beat him in front of his two young
children, before dragging him outside and into a truck, bloodied and still
in his underwear.

In the weeks that followed his abduction, his family
made frantic efforts to obtain any details about what happened to him. What
took place can only be surmised by the unidentified, broken body that was
found in a field in Goromonzi, 20 miles outside the capital, and taken to
the mortuary at Harare's Parirenyatwa hospital. Mr Ndira was reportedly
identified only after someone recognised the mutilated corpse from its tall
and thin frame and guessed the rest.

It was a fate that would not
have surprised the man himself. Interviewed by the BBC's Panorama programme
in 2002, Mr Ndira said: "We are prepared to die. It is just the same, we are
still dying in Zimbabwe. We are dying by hunger, by diseases, everything, so
there is nothing to fear."

Fear is exactly what the Mugabe regime is
counting on as it looks to overturn a first-round defeat that saw 56 per
cent of the country voting against the only president they have known since
independence, and saw his party lose its majority in the lower house of
parliament. The octogenarian leader, who famously boasted that he has a
"degree in violence", is relying on state security personnel backed up by
paid militias to prevent a similar result in the run-off ballot.

The
outcome of the first round was withheld for more than five weeks before the
government conceded that Mr Tsvangirai had beaten Mr Mugabe by six points,
though falling just short of an overall majority because a third candidate,
Simba Makoni, took a small share of the vote.

A leading Zimbabwean army
general has called on the nation's soldiers to vote for Mr Mugabe in the
run-off or quit the military, the state-run Herald newspaper reported. The
chief of staff, Major-General Martin Chedondo, told troops: "Soldiers are
not apolitical. Only mercenaries are apolitical. We have signed up and
agreed to fight and protect the ruling party's principles of defending the
revolution. If you have other thoughts, then you should remove that
uniform." He added that Mr Mugabe was head of the defence forces and "we
should therefore stand behind our commander-in-chief". This echoes a similar
statement by the joint chiefs of staff before the first round, in which they
said they would not recognise any government other than that of Mr Mugabe,
and they would refuse to salute Mr Tsvangirai if he won.

The MDC leader
returned to Zimbabwe only last weekend, having stayed abroad for most of the
past two months amid fears for his safety. On Friday, he gave what he called
a "state of the union" address in which he called for a "new era of
governance" in the country. Publicly, Mr Tsvangirai has said he remains
confident that Zimbabweans will defy the intimidation campaign. However,
there are serious concerns as to whether a democratic shift is at all
possible. "We are witnessing the actions of a government which has thrown
caution to the wind and will do anything to win the run-off," said Mr
Coltart.

Despite this, he believes Mr Tsvangirai still has an
"excellent chance" of defeating Mr Mugabe. In March, he said, the urban vote
was low because of scepticism about the electoral process. The surprise
result that time is likely to lead to a sharp increase in turnout in Harare
and Bulawayo, increasing the overall vote by up to 300,000, most of which is
likely to go to the MDC candidate.

South
Africa’s BEE laws inherently xenophobic

Zim Online

by Mutumwa
Mawere

Sunday 01
June 2008

As of today the death toll from
xenophobic attacks totals 62, with 670 injured and 1 300 people arrested and an
economic cost still to be determined.

As we all reflect on this
unfortunate development in South Africa, one of the most positive outcomes is
that an opportunity has been created for a frank and honest conversation about
what it means to be African.

Apartheid is buried but the image
of what it means to be South African and who is entitled to be a South African
may find its roots in the construction of a colonial and subsequently an
apartheid state. It is undeniable that white South Africans are as foreign to
South Africa as are post apartheid black Africans.

What makes a white South African
immigrant a more acceptable face of South Africa than a black African? Could one
of the answers lie in the economic definition of black people as well as
Africans in the various legislations that have been passed in post-apartheid
South Africa?

In terms of South African
legislation, black people is a generic term which means Africans, Indians, and
Coloureds. It is accepted that the term African is restricted to indigenous
people. When South Africans negotiated a settlement to end apartheid, a new
definition of a South African was then agreed and
crystallised.

Under this framework, white South
Africans and black people who were citizens of the country prior to 1994 are the
only ones who are entitled to legitimately claim to be authentic citizens in
terms of the country’s Black Economic Empowerment (BEE)
definition.

Accordingly, in the context of
the BEE project that was framed by apartheid beneficiaries as an instrument of
assimilating the black political elites, a new definition of an eligible black
for economic empowerment was then coined i.e. historically disadvantaged
individual (HDI) or previously disadvantaged individuals (PDI).

The constitution of South Africa
was then crafted recognising the historical legacy of apartheid and the need to
level the economic playing field. Both black and white political and
non-political actors accepted a construction that a black immigrant is not meant
to be an economic beneficiary of the post-apartheid dispensation at the expense
of black South African persons and notwithstanding any commitment to a
pan-African project.

It can then be rationally argued
that xenophobia’s roots must be located in the minds of the framers of the BEE
project. It would, therefore, be wrong to blame the practitioners of physical
violence when the construction of the post-apartheid state had in its foundation
an anti-black African immigrant tone.

It can also be argued that
xenophobia may not be a reflection of only the attitudes of the perpetrators of
violence but a generally held view that South Africa belongs to a certain class
of people and benefits of economic progress must be reserved.

Indeed, if economic power can be
transferable to black elites on often non-transparent basis through so-called
BEE deals then it can be argued that why should the poor not be part of the deal
when they all fit into the definition of PDI and HDI?

The following are some of the
acts that have been passed by the post-apartheid parliament dominated by
the African National Congress (ANC) on which the xenophobic passion may have its
roots. These include:

It provides a legislative
framework for the promotion of black economic empowerment; empowers the Minister
of Trade and Industry to issue codes of good practice and to publish
transformation charters; to establish the Black Economic Empowerment Advisory
Council; and to provide for matters connected therewith. The Minister is not
empowered to look after black emigrants.

Deals with beneficiation
activities in the mining sector and clarifies the empowerment requirements in
respect of beneficiation activities first contemplated in the Mining
Charter.Assented to on 15 April
2006.

Relevant to the determination of
the Human Resource Management criteria of the BEE Scorecard

A number of regulations and
charters in various sectors have been put in place reflecting the consensus that
only pre-1994 black people as defined ought to share the economic spoils of
South Africa to the exclusion of black emigrants.

This view is not held only at the
lower end of the economic spectrum but is a shared one among blacks and
whites.

In the post-apartheid Africa, it
has now been accepted that there are two Africas i.e. South Africa and the rest
of Africa. In South Africa, it is now an economic and legislative imperative to
empower black persons. However, the untapped resources of the rest of the
continent are regarded as fair game for the reconfigured/empowered South African
enterprises with no policy on empowering the rest of the black
Africans.

At the continental level, there
is no conversation about the need for pan-African empowerment charter. The
absurd development is that South African capital is now being exported on a
tricky foundation that is premised on the notion that empowering the pre-1994
blacks is a necessary and sufficient condition for economically colonising the
rest of the continent.

Although the decolonisation
project was prosecuted on the basis that an injury to one black person was an
injury to all, the post apartheid empowerment project is reserved to black
persons as defined. Some may legitimately ask how a movement like ANC with its
commitment to the pan-African project could end up being the architect of a new
Africa that makes black Africans born outside the perimeters of the country be
less African than their white and Indian colleagues.

The heritage of South Africa can
only confer benefits to black people as defined, ignoring the consequences of
the Berlin Conference of 1885 that split the continent into convenient economic
units that separated brothers and sisters depending on who was privileged to be
the master.

What would be the consequences if
other countries in Africa were to adopt the same attitude that only their
indigenous people should benefit? In the case of South Africa, the xenophobic
sentiment resonates with many white people who genuinely believe that they have
a better claim on South Africa than their fellow black
immigrants.

It has been argued that the
recent xenophobic attacks were motivated by President Thabo Mbeki’s stance on
Zimbabwe. A proposition has been made that white and black Zimbabweans anxious
for change may have invested in the xenophobic project as a way of encouraging
Zimbabweans living in South Africa to return to Zimbabwe and vote as well
exposing his alleged hypocrisy.

The anger expressed by black
South Africans was as predictable as the consequences of a superficial
empowerment process. It is clear that South Africa, through its various laws,
has accepted that it is a different African country and black Africans have to
take note and plan accordingly.

White South Africans have argued
that the country is an attractive destination for black Africans after 52 years
of uhuru precisely because they made it happen. They feel vindicated that Africa
will never be a viable project without their intervention and
control.

If black Africans can in their
millions run away from the anti-imperialist legend, Zimbabwe’s President Robert
Mugabe, then it is argued that this is enough evidence supporting the deeply
held view that Africans cannot rule themselves and were not ready for
independence.

The framers of the colonial state
justified the denial of civil and economic rights to black Africans on the basis
that they had brought the civilisation that created the state as an institution
and to the extent that they gave themselves credit for entrepreneurship that
then funded the state, they maintained that they were entitled to exclusively
benefit from the fruits of the initiative.

However, in accepting BEE, a new
language has been created in South Africa and is supported by law that being a
pre-1994 black person one has an entitlement to extract from whites part of what
they accumulated during the colonial and apartheid eras.

It must accept that if apartheid
South Africa had been governed the same way that for example Zimbabwe has been
governed, then surely the influx of black Zimbabweans would be unthinkable. What
is not deniable, for example, is that the estimated 3 million Zimbabweans living
and working in South Africa are critical drivers of economic growth and they do
contribute to the fiscus.

Unlike their white immigrants,
black Zimbabweans have failed to invest in being South African in as much as
whites have done. Indeed, it would be unthinkable for a black Zimbabwean born
South African to aspire to be a Mayor of Cape Town in post-apartheid South
Africa, for example, in as much as Mayor Helen Zille has done without attracting
xenophobic attacks.

Having lived and worked in South
Africa for the past 13 years, I also came to the conclusion that it is important
to be part of the solution than be part of the problem. I acquired South African
citizenship not because Zimbabwean citizenship is inferior but because I am an
economic contributor to the South African project in as much as any other
immigrant.

If Indians and whites can be
accepted as South Africans then surely it cannot and should not be the case that
Zimbabwean-born persons like us should apologise for being part of the South
African story.

Recognising that when English
people came to South Africa they saw the need of creating an Old Mutual in 1845
to serve their interests and the Afrikaners followed suit in 1928 by creating
Sanlam, I am proud to say that I was one of the founding members of Africa
Heritage Society (AHS), on the same principles of mutuality that underpinned Old
Mutual and Sanlam with the only difference that we do not hold the same racist
views that informed the colonial state.

As a
member of AHS, I believe strongly that it is important that we begin to engage
in conversations about what kind of Africa we want to see. Should we have a
black only Africa? Should we have an empowered South Africa only with its
empowered companies exporting the model to the rest of the continent? Who is an
African? Who should benefit from Africa’s resources? Is the South African
BEE-related legislation consistent with the values of pan-Africanism? What would
be the implications on Africa’s growth and transformation if other African
countries were to cut and paste the South African empowerment legislation and
enact similar laws in their countries? –
ZimOnline

Comment from a correspondent

It was a pity reading that Grace
swore at a rally that noone, other than a Zanu PF member will ever move
into the State house. The State House is not Zanu PF property but property
for the Government.

If I were Grace, I would refrain from using such
words with a cruel hidden meaning. Grace is likely to outlive "Baba".
Accordingly, so she should avoid making comments which might implicate her
as a party to the on-going violence, lest one day perpetrators of violence
are brought to be answerable to their atrocious deeds.

Coming from
Grace, this is not surprising though, as she is selfish and immoral. The
world has not forgotten that she conceived two children whilst she was
having an adulterous affair with the Robert Mugabe whilst his wife was still
alive.

I pray, voters in the upcoming presidential re-run, will go to the
polls in their thousands to exercise their right to vote. Zanu PF, as a
party, has failed the country and the rest of Africa. Even Mugabe himself
knows this. How would he not know when his own groceries are brought in
from South Africa and other countries. It is also reported that he had to
be flown to Asia for medical treatments.

People are being murdered,
raped and tortured on a daily basis and Mugabe does not openly condone
violence and bring perpetrators to justice.

Zanu PF is a party whose only
weapon to stay in power is to use violence on its own people to have no
effective opposition. "Opposition" party is required to give the outside
world a semblance of Democracy. If Mugabe wins, this culture of violence
will be there to stay and life is going to be unbearable for all in
Zimbabwe. Zanu PF is a party whose officials act as though they are "naļve
wives" of Mugabe to protect their own selfish needs. They dare not question
his policy or bring up their own views, if they are likely to be rejected by
Mugabe. We have a big cabinet but it's a waste of money since its
ineffective since only the wishes of an ailing 84 year-old prevails. People
of Zimbabwe fought to have peace, joy and prosperity in their nation not to
be under perpetual rule of a violent Party or Leader.